[Buddha-l] Jesus is Buddha?

[curt]

We also know for a dead certainty that the Buddha did not intend for 
there to exist static written copies of his exact words. Such an idea 
either never occurred to him - or it did and he said "nope". This 
implies that those who have been "interpreting" the Buddha's teachings 
have, in fact, been doing exactly what he intended people to do. And 
those who have been trying to determine, and arguing over, exactly what 
he said are not thinking very clearly. Even worse would be those who try 
to use what's written in the Sutras/Suttas "against" various teachings 
that have (apparently) evolved over time.

I apologize for pointing out the obvious - I don't want anyone to think 
that I think that I am saying anything new or astounding her.
- Curt

Robert Morrison wrote:

>Richard:
>
>  
>
>This is where we disagee. I claim we really don't have the faintest
>idea what the Buddha taught. All we can know is what some people tell us
>the Buddha taught. But their account is already an interpretation, a
>rewriting of history. 
><
>
>Surely, just as we do not know what the Buddha actually taught, how can we
>say that what we have is nothing more than an interpretation, or a rewriting
>of history - surely we would have to know what he taught in order to make
>such a statement?
>
>After all, I assume that as these early disciples weren't fishermen (aka
>Hume), they might be a bit more honest and reliable.
>
>Robert Morrison  
>_______________________________________________
>buddha-l mailing list
>buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
>http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>
>
>  
>